1. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    First of all, there is really no denying that ballast testing takes place. I am a ship's engineer, and have participated in ballast testing of a new-built ship. It is a big deal. When a ship is built, the weight of all equipment, including wiring, piping, major loads such as engines, etc, including such things as normal galley stoves, even bedding, is all calculated.
    However. There are always unknowns. What if the wall panels were slightly heavier, what if the cabinetry was slightly lighter? For that reason, an ACTUAL test has to be made, because during the testing, the ACTUAL response is recorded to produce a complete system of load charts which the Captain will use to calculate stability of the vessel under any particular loading. Before every voyage, the current loads as well as their positions on the ship, are input into these charts or modern software, and the expected stability is found to be acceptable or not. The key terms here are center of gravity and "righting moment", which is the tendency for the ship to "right" itself after the sea causes it to lean over. The center of gravity must be low enough to develop sufficient "righting moment", a counteracting force which brings the ship back upright and prevents a capsize.

    I am absolutely certain that, despite differences in an airplane's situation as a bouyany object on the sea compared to a ship's, ballast testing does take place.

    During testing, this plane crashed, (crash during takeoff, plane stalled due to too much weight aft of the aft center of gravity)text describes electric pumps and gravity flow being used to transfer water between tanks:

    Here is yet another example. The original build number 1 for the 747 sits decaying in Seattle. It was never sold. Folks there want to turn it into a museum. Some of the original ballast barrels are still installed in the plane. The caption reads:
    Source(picture #6 of 11):


    These ballast barrels are not something mysterious. They are not something new. They are not something out of the ordinary. To portray them without explanation, without attribution, and without sourcing the origin of the photos is, at least on the "originator" level, a public disservice, if not an outright intentional deception.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. GregMc

    GregMc Senior Member

    Yup. Ballast tanks are about people sized on flight test aircraft so the airliner structure in its passenger configuration can be tested.The tanks weigh more than normal people when full of water but pretty sure they need to be a similar size for a different reason .. to get them in. That means they need to get the tanks in through the passenger doors rather than huge great panels or whatever you could build for a custom modified spraying plane.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. captfitch

    captfitch Active Member

    Plus, the load distribution can't exceed the load limit per square foot of the floor. So in addition to the door size limit, you also can't just put one big heavy tank anywhere. And those floor load limits are surprisingly low since they also multiply up to the maximum g load limit. So a floor that is placarded to hold Max 300 pounds and the plane has a max g load limit of 2.5 positive g's, then that floor has been demonstrated to handle 750 pounds.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    In a "Global Skywatch" conference call on 3/18/13, John Massaria discussed these ballast barrel photos. here is what he said:
    I have been unable to find any photos of the tanks that Massaria is speaking of.

    I don't know why he said this. Perhaps he knows of such photos, perhaps he has a false recollection of such a thing, or perhaps he is fabricating this story.

    The only thing close to a "chemical" sign I have seen associated with these ballast barrels is this example where we said that something was photoshopped.
    The picture on the left is faked, it has been clearly photoshopped to insert the words "hazmat inside". You can tell this by the way the Hazmat text is blurred after it was put in place.

    The original source photo is here, from 2005, at an airliner enthusiast site:
    The earliest source of the image after the photoshopped "Hazmat- Inside" text was added is here, from 2005:


    At the German site which first carried the fake photo with a Hazmat sign photoshopped in, there is an additional "closeup" photo of the Hazmat text:


    Bottom line is that there are no photos available that I can find which have ballast barrels and anything resembling a "DOT tag" as claimed by John Massaria.

    There is only this faked image from a German website.

    Question: John Massaria, in his own words says that he "misrepresented" the ballast tank photos in his video. Now, why does he misrepresent the Hazmat sign as being on a tank, when it was clearly photoshopped onto a wall?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    I was wondering about the ballast tanks so some rough calculations could be done on the amount of coverage you could get from them if they were used for spraying. I did some calculations based on the Evergreen capacity and the coverage area a fb user gave me and it came out at a tiny amount per sq metre. I didn't hear back from them after that.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    In the same "Global Skywatch" conference call on 3/18/13, John Massaria also said:
    Below, I give my best shot at describing what the equipment shown is for. Some comments:
    - the tanks are not meant to be pressurized past about 200 psi
    -the vent system shows that this system is not meant to hold pressure, in the event of an overfill, there is a catchment tank
    -The 2 inch PVC main lines and plastic vent tubing are not suitable for hydrocarbons or dangerous chemicals
    -The 2 inch main lines leading into the tanks show that a liquid is being transferred, not a gas
    -the system is not suitable for a powder

    In all respects, the system looks exactly like what it is, a system for transfer of ordinary water for ballast simulations in flight tests.

    ballast barrel details.

    Question: John Massaria had plenty of discussion here about these photos, he admits that he previously misrepresented these photos, then why does he continue the misrepresentation of these photos by making claims like those above?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    For the same reason that Moonstar Madison ignores what is a fake chemplane and calls the YouTube 'disinformation'?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Danny55

    Danny55 Member

  9. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Now I see that the youtube video has been removed. Perhaps they have finally figured it out, or maybe Youtube is censoring videos about Facebook censoring videos.

    It's all very confusing.....:rolleyes:
  10. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    In the comments on the FB link this shows up

    And one person suggested that a bunch of folks post it. These folks KNEW that there was a copyright problem and yet the continue to post it--duh.

    You Tube is sensitive to more things than FB is. My name was slandered in some You Tube cartoons and after reporting it, the poster ended up losing their you tube account. I think some of them managed to get their IP banned, because they moved to other video sites. And the reports were repeated and they moved again. I think that they ran out of sites.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. FreiZeitGeist

    FreiZeitGeist Senior Member

    The History of this fake is well-known and descriped here:


    The "Freigeist-Forum" http://www.freigeistforum.com doesn´t allow Search-Engines to crawl through. They also have a great "members-only-section". It s not easy to get an account to this forum, they only accept people they know. It is a esoteric UFO, Free-Energy, Anti-zionism up to rigth-wing Forum. very ugly.
    • Like Like x 3
  12. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    I've sold a few farms where the buyers wanted the soil tested for chemicals because they wanted to do organic farming. THey had to hire a private company, and they did not test to see what was in the soil, they tested the soil for specific substances. The buyer had to specifically state what they were looking for.
  13. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    In Texas, the state AG dept will do some tests, but you have to pay for them and you have use containers that they supply. It is so easy to contaminate samples.
  14. Steve Funk

    Steve Funk Active Member

    Sometimes Francis Mangels refers to his lab results as EPA data. It is actually a private lab certified by the EPA to do these tests.
  15. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    That could be, but wouldn't she need to PAY for them?
  16. Danny55

    Danny55 Member

  17. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    Where did they get the idea about 'frozen lakes of methane' in Siberia? Methane doesn't freeze till almost -300 F, at one atmosphere of pressure, so how can there be frozen lakes under the tundra?

    I guess this is what they saw


    The ice and frozen tundra has methane trapped under it. It seems that a lot of it is biological in origin. Sort of like the methane in the flaming tap water
  18. Jazzy

    Jazzy Closed Account

    According to George Orwell in his novel "1984", doublethink is:

    “ To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that <Truth> was impossible and that the <Movement> was the guardian of <Truth>, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself – that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink.”

    “ The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."


    That is how, don't care about the why..
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Jazzy

    Jazzy Closed Account

    Methane IS soluble under pressure though, making associations with ice.


    Deeply buried pockets of frozen tundra might well contain a reservoir of methane we wouldn't like to meet. It would be better to harvest and burn it and accept the CO2 burden, or harvest it as a plastic monomer, rather than simply allow it to unfreeze in rising global temperatures, to do its deadly work.

    Or better still, not to allow global temperatures to rise in the first place. Without delay.
  20. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Perhaps it is to do with methane hydrate under oceans that the Japanese have recently announced they can extract??

    Given the chemmie "confusion" (deliberate or otherwise) about most things to do with anything scientific??
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. David Fraser

    David Fraser Senior Member

    So if underground oil comes from dinosaurs does underground methane come from dinosaur farts??

    Sorry but I'm Dave and I am here all week.

    I'll get my coat then???
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  22. Trailspotter

    Trailspotter Senior Member

    Well, it comes from many different sources. Methanogenic bacteria and archaea are found not only in animal guts but they are widespread in Nature. Anaerobic degradation of organic waste at the bottom of lakes and swamps produces a lot of methane.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  23. Jazzy

    Jazzy Closed Account

    LOL. Yes, but more accurately the heating from beneath by the earth, the compression and fractionation of organic material layers in the deep subsoils. Everything gets distilled off at a subduction zone, for instance, but also where crustal folding takes place, where subsurface material also gets pushed down into the melt. It isn't impossible for the rising methane to "surface" beneath frozen tundra, and settle happily into it.

    I remember you are big.

    Have you met my friend, Mahatma?
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    I think he was talking about this photo as to the label (Patent Number) : http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...XSdOUdLZBKrP0gHEnIGwDQ&ved=0CD8Q9QEwBA&dur=84

    and this one is the has no hoses... http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...XSdOUdLZBKrP0gHEnIGwDQ&ved=0CEgQ9QEwBw&dur=98
  25. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    The first one is from where they spray a flame retardant on buildings to help protect them from wild fires, the second is more ballast tanks


    Looks like the same tanks to me---that is from an AIR SHOW in Germany---how can it be top secret if it is shown to the public?

  26. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    Cairenn- read what I wrote.
  27. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    John may have been talking about THIS photo.... the one Jay Shows is not even in the video... man what is wrong with you people? http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/weather-modification-history
  28. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

  29. Danny55

    Danny55 Member

  30. HappyMonday

    HappyMonday Moderator

  31. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    The photo you link to shows a patent number, NOT a D.O.T. sticker. There is no need to wonder what John Massaria "may have been talking about". This is what he said:

    D.O.T. stands for "Department of Transportation". The D.O.T. has regulations and a classification scheme for labeling hazardous material. D.O.T. stickers should be familiar to anyone who lives here in the USA, they are seen on any truck, ship or plane which carries hazardous materials. They look like this:

    D.O.T. stickers.

    There are NO D.O.T. tags on ANY of the ballast barrels in ANY of these photos.
    Massaria spent several days discussing these photos, we showed and discussed them over and over. Why did John Massaria try to portray a photoshopped version of a COPYRIGHTED photo as showing a "D.O.T. tag" when seeking support from his friends yet Massaria NEVER MADE MENTION of such a tag during the discussion here?

    I think he just makes stuff up.

    You are correct, that particular photo has no hoses. But John Massaria DID NOT mention a tank which "has no hoses". A tank which has no hoses wouldn't be suspicious, it would in fact have absolutely no utility at all other than storage!

    Yet John Massaria did assert this:

    The tanks unregistered shows do indeed have have "no hoses". But Massaria said the tanks he saw were "ejecting chemical or water out the top". The photo which 'unregistered' shows have no such facility, they appear to be static weights which are also used in these tests. The A-380 water ballast syatem 'unregistered' directs us to is for an aircraft which has two decks.


    It is likely that the A-380 does not require all tanks on all decks to transfer water ballast to achieve the necessary testing. In fact, the series of photos which 'unregistered' directs us to indeed shows that some of the tanks used in that test DO have solenoid valves and piping which comes out of the bottom of the tanks, indicating they are being used to transfer a liquid. Furthermore, the equipment is clearly labeled as an AIRBUS FLIGHT TEST, and as Cairenn pointed out, these were published in newspapers. After discussing these photos for three days, Massaria surely would have become familiar enough with them to ask

    solenoid flight test.

    Again, Massaria discussed these photos on seven pages of dialogue. Massaria NEVER mentioned the words "hose", "solenoid", or "tags" during that discussion.
    Where did he come up with those notions when discussing the issue with his friends? I cannot answer. You should direct those questions to him.
  32. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    Reminds me of Answers in Genesis, with their list of things NOT to use to argue against evolution.
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 20, 2013
  33. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Madisonstar Moon seems to be on a mission to claim every single "Tanks on a Plane" as evidence of chemtrails. Here she shows some ferry fuel tanks:


    Which is taken from here:

    She's actually got a very nice collection, it's just rather disingenuous of her to post them without explanation. Like this one:
    Which is not a tank at all, it's NOAAs Ozone Differential Absorption Lidar,

    And this one:
    Another NOAA image, this one is: "Dr. Lubchenco launches a dropsonde instrument from a NOAA WP-3 research aircraft."

    All of here images can easily be found by dragging the photo into Google images
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    • Like Like x 9
  34. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    • Like Like x 1
  35. Danny55

    Danny55 Member

    "And what can one DO about chemtrails? Well for starters, buy my STUFF!

    "On a personal level, you can also take this amazing natural supplement called ChemBuster – a combination of herbal and homeopathic remedies deliberately designed to combat chemtrails." "

    Only $27.00 for a 1 oz bottle. Cheap at half the price!
  36. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
  37. TWCobra

    TWCobra Senior Member

    Madison Moon Star V Matt McIness (Australians against Chemtrails)... (neither will ever come on here so do I violate the politeness policy by [...])

    The following is the redoubtable Miss Moonstar posting in response to a post by McIness which I posted elsewhere on the forum. Matt McIness has no qualms instantly deleting any dissent but I wonder what he will do here because this is another believer, just a believer in another strain on chemtrailia..

  38. TWCobra

    TWCobra Senior Member

    Of note however is that the original post, calling the photos of ballast tanks and claiming that those who call them proof of spraying and therefore disinfo, has been deleted. Strike a blow for political correctness... we can't have the truth upsetting fellow CT believers.
  39. Cairenn

    Cairenn Senior Member

    After I posted the origins of a couple of her pictures, she blocked me. I did not accept her friend request on FB. There is no way I would allow her to get access to my friends.
  40. JFDee

    JFDee Senior Member

    Hmm, but in the post you quoted Madison writes:

    In my opinion, when writing about chemtrail believers or proponents, self restriction will pay off even when the urge to ramble is big sometimes. (BTW, this goes to everyone concerned, including myself.)

    There is a community of fellows here, and I can understand that sometimes people want to loosen up a bit among 'comrades'.
    Only - nothing is off the record in a public forum. Google et al. will make notes.

    Imagine a bystander or someone 'on the fence' - when he looks into the writings of both sides, should he just see ramble against ramble?
    Shouldn't he rather see a difference in attitude? Which attitude is more likely to make him seriously consider the arguments?
    • Like Like x 3